marvelfandomcom-20200222-history
Talk:Nathaniel Grey (Earth-295)
Big mistake whoever put pseudo-vampirism as one of nate's powers needs to check their facts. jubilee is the vampire, not nate. See references. He was infected by Morbius, and he was a vampire-like being like Morbius (not real vampire). Jubilee now infected, and possibly may become a real vampire, like Dracula. Harasar 14:32, August 2, 2010 (UTC) Nate can come back Nate Grey was one of my favorite character on a line of good things that Marvel did in the time of his creation. The comic was easily one of the best that the 90's had produced and I believe had it have stay true to it's original style and story (that is of course after they had mastered Nates Temperment to a certain degree) the comics longevity would have spanned much further than it did. Unfortunately the release of the movie along with the seggestions of chris claremmont caused for his cancelation due to bad writing and even worse artwork. I miss him, and maybe one day he will be back. Fingers crossed fans. -- :as in endangered species Dark beast & beast were saying if they collected all of Nate atoms & stuff he can be bought back to life & i upped pics of his "death" also & yes ' i want Nate back' . :Praetor HellionVulcan 17:02, 2 May 2008 (UTC) Nathaniel? Is there any basis for his real name being "Nathaniel"? I've NEVER heard him referred to as Nathaniel (not sure I've heard Nathan either...but that's easier to believe). --GrnMarvl14 19:49, 2 May 2009 (UTC) :No basis that I know of, who made the edit? What do the handbooks say? Was he named 'Nate' specifically? (I'd think it's Nathan, since Cable's name is Nathan). :— Nathan (Peteparker) (Earth-1218) (talk • • ) 22:52, 2 May 2009 (UTC) ::Book of the Dead (from 2004) lists him as Nate Grey. In the Age of Apocalypse entry in the Official Handbook A-Z hardcover Vol 1, he's also listed as Nate Grey (though Cannonball's listed as Sam Guthrie). Not sure where else (if anywhere) he's been profiled. ::--GrnMarvl14 23:43, 2 May 2009 (UTC) :::X-Man #-1 has Sinister calling him Nathan, and as his creator, I think Sinister would be the ultimate authority on Nate's real name. I've never heard the character called Nathaniel. I think we're fine where we are.--Max 04:46, 3 May 2009 (UTC) ::::Agreed. No Nathaniel from what I have read either. Nathaniel is a formalized Nathan, but does not necessarily mean that his name is Nathaniel. --M1shawhan 04:56, 3 May 2009 (UTC) :I'm reverting the page move, barring some sort of confirmation for "Nathaniel." :--GrnMarvl14 16:01, 23 May 2009 (UTC) :::Why is his page at Nathaniel when no one confirmed that name?--Max 03:07, May 18, 2010 (UTC) ::::Didn't check the citation, did you? ::::--GrnMarvl14 20:00, May 18, 2010 (UTC) cable/nathan relation I was wondering about the edit removing the claim that Cable was his genetic twin. While it is true that they come from very different backgrounds, X-Man being a creation from the DNA of the 295-Cyclops and Jean Grey, respectively, and Cable being the biological son of the 616-Cyclops and Madelyne Pryor, indeed the genetic base material would be the same, since Jean Grey and Madelyne Pryor are gentically identical. I'm not sure whether that holds true across the borders of the multiverse as well, but it is certainly undeniable that the two characters are "related" in some way. I was wondering if there was a better, possibly more accurate wording for this than "genetic twin"?--edkaufman 12:33, November 16, 2009 (UTC) :Genetic "brothers"?--Max 21:44, November 16, 2009 (UTC) ::"Cross-temporal genetic relation"? Too complicated? Not entirely accurate? ::--GrnMarvl14 23:13, November 16, 2009 (UTC) :::"Alternate Reality Genetic Half-Brothers", since their mother, although of the same DNA, is different, and their fathers are from different realities, so they're really not even half-brothers. Sure, they come from the same gene-pool, but really not from the same parents whatsoever. :::Talk about a tough relation. Did they ever meet? :::— Nathan (Peteparker) (Earth-1218) (talk • • ) 18:05, November 17, 2009 (UTC) ::::I'd bet almost anything on it. C'mon, it was 90s. Everyone was meeting everyone. ::::--GrnMarvl14 21:41, November 17, 2009 (UTC) :::::Sure, they had some crossovers. Can't remember all the circumstances off hand. It was the 90's. X-books crossed over so much plot points would happen in the wrong book sometimes.--Max 08:02, November 18, 2009 (UTC) : I quickly leafed through what i could find as common appearances in the database: In , there's the following caption: "His name is Nate Grey. Torn from a timeline that has since been erased, he is genetically identical to Cable in every way... including mutant power." Would certainly speak for the genetic twin idea, wouldn't it? Since Madelyne and Jean are genetically identical, it would make sense for their respective sons with the same father to be genetically identical too. The only problem, scientifically (as far as i can tell with lay knowledge) speaking, with that is that during a natural birth (Cable) genes would be scrambled around in a different way than during the making of a genetic cocktail (Nate). But considering what the ish says is canon, are we back to genetic twin? BTW, Nate calls Cable "big brother" in the same ish. Also in , Stryfe calls Nate "just another Cable, just another me." what do you think?--edkaufman 13:38, November 18, 2009 (UTC) :In Cable's last Handbook entry, X-Man is listed as his "alternate timeline half-brother." Which makes sense, since Scott was married to both Jean and Madelyne. :--GrnMarvl14 22:31, November 18, 2009 (UTC) ::The thing about genetic twins reference though is that its just bad... bad.... really really bad science.--Max 22:39, November 18, 2009 (UTC) :::I totally agree with you on that. Still: this is Marvel comics we're talking about. Transistors making an Iron Man Armor fly. A radioactive spider turning giving a science geek a "spider sense". Genetic mutation turning a guy's eyes into freaking laser cannons. And in this specific case: A guy from a timeline which turned out never to even have existed at all coming over to anpther universe and looking, sounding and having powers exactly the same as a guy whose base genetic material was the same - btw: all brothers and sisters in the world share the same genetic base material, and the similarities between them are hardly ever as close. Either way, i just think there has to be a linking entry between the two characters: be that "genetic twin" (for which there is canon reference, even though it's bad science) or "alternate timeline half-brother" (which sounds horrible, but is more accurate). can someone make a decision here? --edkaufman 01:03, November 19, 2009 (UTC) ::::Actually, the AoA reality still existed after the fact. And I'm all for whatever's more accurate, in this instance. To me, genetic twin is confusing. After all, aren't ALL twins genetic twins? Plus, while Madelyne may have been a clone of Jean Grey, there's no telling what Sinister screwed around with (same with AoA's Sinister and his creation of Nate), so they might not even be as genetically similar as you're assuming. And, really, twin tends to assume that they came from the same mother. Which isn't the case. Same genes, but if two identical twins had children by the same father, you wouldn't call those children twins. ::::--GrnMarvl14 01:31, November 19, 2009 (UTC) :::::Since their is no reconciling the science with reality (its all essentially magic like just about all Marvel science), I say go with the creator's intent as best as we can, whatever that may be. I have no preference beyond that.--Max 02:47, November 19, 2009 (UTC) :Let's use both, like: "genetic twin/alternate timeline half-brother", since both were specifically said in references. :— Nathan (Peteparker) (Earth-1218) (talk • • ) 15:50, November 20, 2009 (UTC) :Why isn't Nate Grey the AoA version of Cable, both are engineered from the genetics of Scott Summers and Jean Grey(Madelyn Prior) and have virtually the same power? --Lwmorton 01:22, March 15, 2010 (UTC) ::Genetic engineering gets very tricky, especially when the specific genetics that were used haven't been revealed. One slight difference in their genetic makeup and they're completely different people. ::You also have to look at how they were 'created'. Nate Grey was essentially a test-tube baby comprised of Jean and Scott's genes, and Nathan Summers was actually created in Madelyne's womb by natural processes. It's altogether possible that they have the exact same genetic makeup, but it hasn't yet been addressed in comics. ::— Nathan (Peteparker) (Earth-1218) (talk • • ) 17:00, March 15, 2010 (UTC) :::I thought there was something in the X-Man comics that said they weren't alternate counterparts. Something during the time when X-Man was hopping across realities with that alternate Red Queen. :::--GrnMarvl14 17:56, March 15, 2010 (UTC) :: And to add fuel to the fire, what about Nate's relationship to Stryfe? *grins evilly* Thanos6 10:46, June 15, 2011 (UTC) Name Change What was the point of his name changing to Nathaniel (not on here but from the handbook)? --Johnnybravo44 (talk) 07:19, August 5, 2010 (UTC) :Do you mean why did they change it to 'Nathaniel' in the handbook? :— Nathan (Peteparker) (Earth-1218) (talk • • ) 16:50, August 5, 2010 (UTC) ::Yeah. Its kind of a waste as I dont think he was ever called Nathaniel in comics, but they just change it in the handbook? --Johnnybravo44 (talk) 17:25, August 5, 2010 (UTC) :::Keep in mind, he was created and named by Sinister, whose real first name is Nathaniel. If he was never called Nathaniel in the comics, he was likely meant to be called that. :::--GrnMarvl14 23:08, August 5, 2010 (UTC) ::::Ah.. well played. Good point. --Johnnybravo44 (talk) 05:05, August 6, 2010 (UTC) :::::I don't agree with the name change at all. I understand Grn's point, but before a handbook, his name was Nathan Summers. It's in X-Men Omega page 15 second panel: "Warren Worthington will not be mourned, but his sacrifice will allow a new player to enter the arena. His name Nathan Summers". That was the writers and after they decide he's a cool character, they want to retconn his bio. WTF?! ::::::--Wazzirving 02:14, December 21, 2010 (UTC)wazzirving :::::: His name was also Nathan Grey, in . Sinister gave him that name. Grey in honor of Nate's mother, and Nathan in honor of himself. But since Sinister's name is Nathaniel, marvel changed Nate's name. :::::: I think he never was called "Summers" after X-Men Omega, and he called himself "Nate Grey" in a month after X-Men Omega was published, and since he always used this name. :::::: Perhaps writers changed his surname to "Grey", to avoid confusion, because "Nathan Summers" is already exist (Cable), and they are not the same character. Harasar 10:23, December 21, 2010 (UTC) :Likely that's either a reference to Cable or it's a mistake. He was never referred to as Summers prior to coming to Earth-616. So that doesn't really go against him being Nathaniel or Grey. :--GrnMarvl14 02:31, December 21, 2010 (UTC) ::That was his reference to Summers right there. The scene was: Nate was scaling the wall to Apocalypse's citadel, angry Sinister killed Forge, and Angel had just sacrificed himself into the wall, out of anger. They were saying that Angel's sacrifice gave Nathan the cover he needed to enter undetected. No reference to Cable and I doubt it was a mistake. That was before he, Dark Beast, Sugarman, or Holocaust were sent to mainstream by the M'Kraan Crystal, there's your prior to Earth-616. Like I said, I bet they just decided to change their minds, or writers, at one point. :::--Wazzirving 07:47, December 21, 2010 (UTC)wazzirving Harasar, that I agree with. I do not like it, but I do agree that, for reasons unknown, they just decided to change it. Sinister called him Nathan Grey in , the narrator called him Nathan Summers in , he called himself Nate Grey in , and then the handbook officially named him Nathaniel Grey. I know he went through names, but it would've been nice to give a name that had a reason, like Rogue changing her name to Anna Raven at one point. I don't like it because he was never an official citizen and therefore, his creator should get naming rights. When he became independent, then he should have chosen a name, but when did ANYONE choose Nathaniel Grey? :--Wazzirving 21:06, December 21, 2010 (UTC)wazzirving Nathaniel's Hair Is the white streak in Nathaniel's hair natural or dyed? I am only asking, because if it is natural, then he could do of being placed in the Category:Heterochromia (something I am willing to do). --Greatestvillain 22:46, December 20, 2010 (UTC) : I think his white streak, actually is gray. When he was a child, he had brown hair( ), but after his power manifested, his hair started turning gray. I think this is due to overstress. : Cable's hair also was originally brown, but now they totally gray. In Cable looks like Nate. Harasar 04:52, December 21, 2010 (UTC) :: Heterochromia is two different eye colors, not two different hair colors. Also, the reason Cable's hair is white isn't from overstress, it's because he's about fourty years old. :::I have no idea how old Cable is. But if he's "about fourty years old" and has a full head of white hair, the man is probably stressed. Or he's just older. --[[User:Johnnybravo44|'Johnnybravo'44]] (talk) 03:10, August 26, 2011 (UTC) Error X-Man isn't a potential phoenix avatar. He's already more powerful than the phoenix force, why would he need to be an avatar for it? :It's not about need, it's about fact. If it has appeared or been said in a comic, that makes it true enough for the site. :— Nathan (Peteparker) (Earth-1218) (talk • • ) 04:54, March 2, 2011 (UTC) "Secret Identity?" Didn't he spend all that time as the messiah of Central Park? Thanos6 10:46, June 15, 2011 (UTC) : Yes, he was a messiah. But then Purple Man used his powers to destroy Nate's popularity and claiming him as a terrorist. After Nate defeated Killgrave, he erased all memories about himself. Harasar 06:40, June 16, 2011 (UTC) :: Ah, I forgot about that part. Thanos6 14:36, June 16, 2011 (UTC) X-Man Power Loss If X-Man's powers are infinite, how could they burn out? My guess is his power loss is similar to Cable's power loss, Cable was forced to continuously use his powers to keep the techno-organic virus from killing him, which burned out his powers, but when he no longer needed to continuously use his powers, they slowly came back and eventually went back to full power. Also, how is it he only burned out his telepathy, and since he still has his telekinesis, does he still have the same abilities as he originally did, like channeling the earth's magnetic pull into an EMP blast or phasing through walls, or can he just move things with his mind? :Not sure where you're going with the question, but I know that when Mr. Sinister created him, he specifically placed the burn-out in his genetic make-up. That way, once Nate killed Apocalypse, Sinister wouldn't have to worry about dealing with him. Cable, like you said, simply over-used his powers and they burned-out over a LONG period of time. ::--Wazzirving 19:39, July 20, 2011 (UTC)wazzirving :::X-Man's powers were forcibly drained and used by Sugar-Man to empower and create mutates and to create portals to other universes using the Omega Machine, a decide designed by Osborn's HAMMER to drain energy from mutants to power Omega. :::--GrnMarvl14 20:25, July 20, 2011 (UTC) :::: Actually, Sinister didn't design him so his powers would eventually burn out, he designed him so his body would eventually burn out, and the tattoo on his chest got rid of this. I still say his powers will eventually come back at full power or near full power eventually. Both Jean and Cable lost some or all of their powers at some time and eventually somehow got them back. Cable was even able to use his powers during his battle with Stryfe after his powers burned out, meaning either he didn't completely burn out his powers or they partially returned, and since Nate and Cable are basically the same person, his powers could eventually come back, at least in latent form. Aslo, according to Wikipedia, his power loss was from nerve damage caused by opening a portal to the Age of Apocalypse, not from overusing them, so theoretically, his powers could come back if the nerve damage isn't permanant. :::::That was ignorance, on my part, I get it now. You're refering to him loosing his powers in the recent New Mutants Vol 3 #27. I agree with Tsl3161991. I believe that Nate and Cable are the same person and that his powers will, definitely, return. After loosing his to the Silver Surfer, Cable used it as he pleased. Stopping a truck thrown from Bishop, using telepathy on the bug people, and, I believe, both on Stryfe. Also, I read, from Dark Beast, that, in Nate and Jean's bodies, each cell was like a power battery in themselves. Power like that doesn't go away, it simply gets misplaced. I've always noticed, in comics, that there has to always be a mediator when you have a titan power level. That goes for Kryponite stopping Superman, Magneto being reduced to a child then brain-wiped, and Cable having the T.O. Virus. Some are constant, are done to extinguish the titan, but you can never let a truly powerful being just exist. It scares the straights and there has to be something to check it. Nate has always been a victim to both and this is simply another example. ::::::--Wazzirving 01:12, July 21, 2011 (UTC)wazzirving :::::::Nate's recent power loss was probably done for the same reason Cable lost his powers, he was just too powerful and need to be taken down a peg or two. Either that, or after Cable died, Nate took his place as a mostly depowered omega-level mutant. Even if his powers don't come back, he doesn't need the ones he lost. His telekinesis was the power he used the most and almost all of his cool powers were from his telekinesis. As long as he has the same control of his telekinesis as he did before, he could still be considered one of the world's most powerful mutants. One thing doesn't make sense, when Nate opened a portal to the Age of apocalypse, he used his telekinesis to warp the boundaries between dimensions. How did he lose a power he didn't even use? :::::::Oh, come on. You never heard of "if you don't use it, you lose it"? ::::::::--Wazzirving 02:51, July 21, 2011 (UTC)wazzirving :::::::::Now that I think about it, his case reminds me of Franklin Richards. After he used all of his powers at full power all at once and his powers completely disappeared from the stress, but they eventually came back. My guess is the same thing happened to Nate. Either that or after using his powers at that magnitude, he subconciously created a mental block to keep him from using his powers at that level again. Also, my theory is that if he avoids using his powers for some time and let his body recover, he should either regain his powers or at least get more power for what little power he now has. His power loss is from nerve damage and if he just lets the nerve damage heal, he should slowly regain his powers. History Why does Nate have two biographies?--MutantMenace 22:18, May 24, 2012 (UTC) X-Man's Powers Returning I think Nate's telepathy might be returning. On Comicvine, it showed a picture of him fighting Ant-Man and it showed him apparently controling a dinosaur to attack him. I know Sunspot taught him a technique to focus his powers enough to defeat the Draumar, so if this isn't a case of artistic error or some sort of misunderstanding, that technique could have helped him regain some of his telepathy, at least enough to control a simple-minded creature like a dinosaur. Even if his telepathy wasn't used in that picture, it looks like his remaining telekinesis is getting stronger, when he first lost his powers he could barely lift a small block a few inches off the ground but he can now move anything that he is physically lift or move and he also seems to have regained his ability to create telekinetic blasts, which for some reason are now X shaped. -- Re-Open for Editing? Considering that Nate is back, with his full powers restored, and is taking a very prominent role in the current arc of Uncanny X-Men and the one that follows (hard to deny it, since it's called 'Age of X-Man'), can the page be re-opened for editing? BritishPhoenix (talk) 18:30, December 7, 2018 (UTC) :Done. -- Annabell (talk) 19:16, December 7, 2018 (UTC)